The Right Must Confront Antisemitism Or Be Defined By It

A dangerous strain of antisemitism is emerging inside the Republican coalition, and failing to confront it now will redefine the movement into something unrecognizable, and terrible.

You can listen to this post on our podcast feed, So, Does It Matter? SPOKEN. It’s available on your favorite podcasting app, or you can find it here.

This is an important message. If you agree with it, share it.

⏱️ 7 min read

---

This Is Not A Debate, It Is A Warning

There are moments when politics stops being about policy and becomes about something more fundamental. October 7 in Israel, and for the world, was one of those moments.

What happened that day was not complicated. It was evil. Civilians were slaughtered because they were Jews. Families were executed. Terrorism was openly celebrated. Events like that should produce clarity. For many, they did. But what has followed has revealed something troubling not just abroad, but here at home.

Antisemitism on the left has been growing for years. Now we are beginning to see that same poison surface on the right. If that sounds overstated, it only means you are not paying close enough attention.

This is no longer something distant or theoretical. It is here, and it is spreading.

They Are Not Populists, They Are Something Else

We need to be clear about what this is and what it is not.

This is not populism. It is not nationalism. It is certainly not Christianity. What we are seeing instead is an attempt to rebrand something far less defensible under more acceptable-sounding labels.

As my friend Ben Shapiro has put it, “What you’re seeing right now on the political right is a deliberate attempt by a small but loud faction to redefine conservatism away from its traditional moorings and toward something rooted in grievance, conspiracy, and a kind of identity politics that mirrors the worst instincts of the left.”

Anyone who spends time in online conservative spaces knows exactly the rhetoric being described. This is not hypothetical.

You can see it in the way legitimate debates about foreign aid, alliances, or America’s role in the world are redirected into insinuations of hidden control. What starts as a policy argument does not stay there. It gets twisted into something else.

You also see it in the slogans and coded language. Phrases like “Christ is King” or “Jesus is King” are sometimes deployed not as expressions of faith, but as political signals. In those moments, the intent is provocation, not worship. Christianity is not being defended. It is being used. Specifically to target the Jewish people.

In some cases, that rhetoric is paired with a distorted theological claim that Jews have been replaced as God’s chosen people and are therefore suspect or undeserving of support. That is not a serious expression of Christian doctrine. It is a misuse of religion to justify hostility toward Jews.

That is not Christianity. That is prejudice dressed up as theology.

Most alarming is the growing willingness to flirt with ideas that should be completely disqualifying in any serious political movement. There are now voices on the right openly minimizing the Holocaust or even questioning its reality.

That is not provocative. It is not clever. It is vile, and it should be treated as such.

The Line Between Policy And Prejudice

Let us draw the line clearly, because this is where too many people hide behind ambiguity.

There is nothing wrong with criticizing Israel. There is nothing wrong with opposing foreign aid. There is nothing wrong with arguing for a more restrained foreign policy. Those are legitimate positions.

But there is a fundamental difference between criticizing a government and targeting a people.

Saying “I oppose U.S. aid to Israel” is a policy argument. Saying or implying that Jews as a group are manipulating American policy is antisemitism.

That is the line.

Once that line is crossed, the conversation is no longer about policy. It is about prejudice.

The problem is not skepticism. The problem is what some people are bringing into that skepticism.

Silence Is Not Neutral, It Is Complicity

The real danger is not that fringe voices exist. The real danger is that they are being tolerated.

As Shapiro has warned, “The real danger is not that fringe figures exist. The real danger is when those figures are elevated… because once that happens, their ideas stop being fringe and start becoming part of the mainstream dialogue.”

That is exactly what is happening.

Voices that traffic in conspiracy, Holocaust minimization, or open hostility toward Jews are being platformed and normalized. Too many people who know better are choosing not to confront it. Some avoid it out of fear. Others out of convenience. Some are out of calculation.

In a recent speech, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz put it bluntly: “If you sit there with someone who says Adolf Hitler was very, very cool… and you say nothing, then you are a coward, and you are complicit in that evil.”

Silence in moments like this is not neutrality. It is permission.

We have seen where that leads. Antisemitism on the left was once dismissed as fringe. Today, it is embedded in large parts of that coalition. It did not start dominant. It was allowed to grow.

So, Does It Matter?

This is our moment for choosing.

Right now, this is still a relatively small group pushing ideas that should be rejected outright. It does not take a majority to reshape a movement. It takes a loud minority and a silent majority unwilling to confront it.

Every conservative, whether an elected official, commentator, activist, or voter, has a choice to make.

Do you draw the line? Or do you blur it?

Do you confront it? Or do you excuse it?

If we fail to draw that line now, this will not remain contained. And if that happens, the consequences will not just be political. The movement will not just be weakened. It will be redefined. And it will no longer be one that embraces our Judeo-Christian heritage.